| bio | website | |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 10 months |
| seen | Apr 1 at 8:36 | |
| stats | profile views | 22 |
|
May 21 |
awarded | Notable Question |
|
Jan 10 |
awarded | Popular Question |
|
Jul 26 |
comment |
PostgreSQL Initial Database Size Interesting stuff, I'll have a read of it and try to get a better understanding of what HOT updates mean to my system. |
|
Jul 24 |
comment |
Aggressive Autovacuum on PostgreSQL This is due to locking of the summary tables, as these are locked using SHARE ROW EXCLUSIVE MODE. Concurrent writes without the lock may succeed, but they are most certainly going to end up with wrong values. Imagine I'm maintaining a count N of rows of type X. If I concurrently insert 2 rows of type X, without locking I will end up with N + 1 in my summary table instead of N + 2. The solution I've adopted is to have a cron job that manually vacuums the summary tables in my database. It works well and seems to be the recommended approach, but it feels too much like a hack to me. |
|
Jul 18 |
revised |
Aggressive Autovacuum on PostgreSQL added 235 characters in body |
|
Jul 18 |
asked | Aggressive Autovacuum on PostgreSQL |
|
Jul 18 |
awarded | Scholar |
|
Jul 18 |
accepted | PostgreSQL Initial Database Size |
|
Jul 18 |
awarded | Editor |
|
Jul 18 |
revised |
PostgreSQL Initial Database Size Updated for posterity. |
|
Jul 18 |
awarded | Supporter |
|
Jul 17 |
awarded | Student |
|
Jul 17 |
asked | PostgreSQL Initial Database Size |